Truth is indeed stranger than fiction;
If I didn't know any better, I would have said that was Tina Fey doing an impersonation. That's sadly not the case. As reported in the Huffington Post, the quote was actually "There is a special place in hell for women who don't help other women," (emphasis mine) and here's what Madeleine Albright had to say about Palin's misquote;
Though I am flattered that Governor Palin has chosen to cite me as a source of wisdom, what I said had nothing to do with politics. This is yet another example of McCain and Palin distorting the truth, and all the more reason to remember that this campaign is not about gender, it is about which candidate has an agenda that will improve the lives of all Americans, including women. The truth is, if you care about the status of women in our society and in our troubled economy, the best choice by far is Obama-Biden.
Indeed, the mix-up about "support" and "help" is not the main issue here. It's that Palin took an out-of-context quote on a coffee cup to support her own campaign and say to the women of America "If you don't vote for my ticket, there's a special place in hell reserved for you." Palin's lack of good judgment, while not surprising at this point, is appalling.
The best part of all this? Palin said that it was "providential" that she saw that quote on her mocha cup, which just goes to show that God made sure Palin got that cup because he knew Palin was going to misread the quote and make a fool of herself. Or it could be, you know, just coincidence.
- Log in to post comments
Or lunacy.
Oh, it was providential, all right — but the providence in question was Loki's.
Me, I'm still shocked that she tried to call herself a progressive.
Hey, I think it's great for female voters to consider larger social and political issues from the perspective of helping other women. Like, for instance, the issue of abstinence-only sex education. How helpful is that to girls and women? Like, for instance, Bristol Palin?
Let's see -- I can vote for an at least moderately progressive ticket whose policies might actually be positive for women, or for a neo-Neanderthal ticket so that one woman can get a high-ranking government job. Gosh, Sarah, what should I do?
A difference that makes no difference is?
Aren't you helping somebody when you support them? Aren't you supporting somebody when you help them? Are the differences really as big as Albright would have them, or is Albright grasping at straws?
One more thing. When, exactly, did Sarah Palin say "me" in her quoting of Madeline Albright? I don't want what you read into it; I don't want what you think she implied; I want the audio or video of the event in question where she said explicitly "...who don't support me...". My ears work fine, English is my native language. I am able to understand what people mean when they say "...who don't support other women." So the word was supposed to be "help" instead of "support". How was the message changed?
She used the wrong word? Fine, she used the wrong word. How was the message changed?
Alan; The point is that Palin took a quote from Madeline Albright (that sounds like it was out of context already) and used it to support her own campaign.
"Help" and "support" can have different meanings depending on context. From what I understand (and if I'm wrong, I'll be glad to be corrected) Alrbight was referring to helping women by having rape deemed a weapon of war by the judges of the UN War Crimes Tribunal. Palin, on the other hand, wants support for her ticket so she can get into the White House. The distinction might be subtle, but context is important.
As for my title, that is clearly the meaning of what Palin said. The implication of the chosen quote was clear. I really don't see how you could have missed it unless you are choosing not to see it. Palin is looking to drum up support from other women just because she is a woman, and I really don't know what else she could be referring to (especially since she isn't known fro women's rights reform!). If you want to argue with my interpretation, then I would ask you what she did mean, or are we supposed to just stop thinking?
Alan,
First off, I got to say, that Madeleine Albright was a little harse given that the quote was from a coffee cup, so there is no reason that Sarah Palin should have been able to discern the context. I should also mention that I'm not familiar with the quote, but from Ms. Albright's objection I take it that she wasn't concerned with the wording but the application, ie that she didn't want to imply that women should blindly vote for other women, but that they should ignore another women's problem if its clear she's being beaten by her husband or some such thing. Hope that helps.
Okay, rereading the post, I guess Brian is making a big deal out of a minor misquote. This was an anecdote, so it is unreasonable to an exact wording, and for all we know Starbucks got it wrong. Though, I will support Brian in that the implication was pretty clear, even if in jest. What, pray tell, do you think she was trying to say, or does she make a habit of reading completely random quotes during her speeches.
On the positive side.... we now know at least one source that Palin reads to stay informed
Let me see if I understand this right.
1) Madeleine Albright said something that was typically foolish, shortsighted, and biased.
2) Starbucks put that line on a coffee cup as a "quote of the day."
3) Sarah Palin saw the quote, decided she liked it, and chose to use it in a political speech in a way that cast its originator's folly into sharp relief.
Right?
I see nothing to get worked up about. Except, perhaps, for the wondrous way in which the quote lays bare the hypocritical folly of the person who said it: an appeal to sexism and bigotry by a member of a party that is supposed to be above such things as sexism and bigotry. One human should support another human, regardless of facts or situation, simply because they have the same kind of reproductive organs? Pshaw! No fiction author would dare to invent such a character or such a party, which so consistently says one thing and does the exact opposite, for any reader would see it as obviously invented and artificial, not realistic at all.
As you say, truth is indeed stranger than fiction.
The meanings of the words overlap in some uses, but have significant differences as well.
If I say "I'm supporting Palin" it would imply that I'm working to get her what she's wanting for herself. In other words, I'd mean that I'm voting for her and trying to get other people to vote for her. I'm not supporting her.
However, if I say "I'm trying to help Palin" it would imply that I'm trying to get for her what she really needs, not just what she wants. I really would "help" her if I could: send her back to school for a broader education, get her mental health counseling to deal with her lying and her attempts at authoritarian control, and coax her into resigning from a race she is not qualified to win before she further humiliates herself and/or brings harm to other people by making decisions out of ignorance.
Whoever wrote her speech was clever enough to know that if she declared there to be hell in store for women who don't "help" (rather than "support") other women, it would be a straight line for a deluge of jokes about "helping" her to someplace other than the vice-presidency, and also mockery about her taking a victim's position and asking for others to aid her because she can't do anything for herself.
So, yes, there's a big difference in this context between "support" and "help," and her speech-writer knew it.
I think I get what she is saying.
1. "There's a place in hell reserved for women who don't support other women"
2. I am a woman
3. Therefore, if you are a woman, and don't support me, you are going to the place in hell reserved for you.
It doesn't really matter where the quote came from, because it was almost certainly taken out of context. I'm shocked that the line was well received by the crowd. I find it appalling.
//Me, I'm still shocked that she tried to call herself a progressive.//
She also said in the debate that the dictators hate us for women's rights.
The woman will not shy away from any lie or distortion,if it serves her purpose.
Couldn't she have just "let this cup pass?"
Well, I guess we can be glad that now we know that she actually can read different things, although not pefectly. After the Courich interview I was not sure she was a reader of anything else than the Bible.
300 million and this is what you come up with. Something is very wrong in the US. We Europeans watch in horror,,,,
Ugh, that hurts to hear. Unconditionally supporting someone because of presence or absence of dangly bits between their legs is sexism just as bad as unconditionally rejecting them for the same reasons.
Personally I think the worst part of this is that Palin can not live up her her own coffee cup's expectations, even setting as side partisan issues like abstinence-only education and reproductive rights. As mayor and as governor she hindered the protection of rape victims and that's something that falls under both "help" and "support."
Oh, but she's a progressive conservative. does that remind you of another catchy, vacant political label being used about 8 years ago?
In other words, Palin ought to be pardoned because she could not be bothered to do a few googles and learn a tiny little bit about the quote she was about to use. Thank you.
In other words, Palin ought to be pardoned because she could not be bothered to do a few googles and learn a tiny little bit about the quote she was about to use. Thank you.
Uh, yeah... Jokes and research papers have different standards of fact checking. Do you take notes while stand-up comics? It was obviously a flippant remark meant to be humorous. It was in bad taste, you can off on that all you want and I'm sure the the remark from Albright will be funny on The Daily Show, but making a huge deal about the context and the misquote is a bit boorish. It was a bit of stupidity from Palin, not intellectual dishonesty.
Good grief. Thanks for posting this Brian. I think it is funny (and sad). And here are pictures of the actual quote:
http://www.reyes-chow.com/images/2007/09/06/img_3312.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1396/1289295949_bcbdf67164.jpg?v=0
She can keep fishing. Just because I am a chick does not mean I will ever vote for her.
..or maybe, G-d noticed the distinct similarity between two different women--both of whom are absolute cows-- who used his name to promote their own personal gains? They just come from two different sides of the 'who owns jeebus' coin.